DOCSLIB.ORG

Re-Regulation and Airline Passengers' Rights Timothy M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Re-Regulation and Airline Passengers' Rights Timothy M Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 67 | Issue 3 Article 7 2002 Re-Regulation and Airline Passengers' Rights Timothy M. Ravich Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Timothy M. Ravich, Re-Regulation and Airline Passengers' Rights, 67 J. Air L. & Com. 935 (2002) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol67/iss3/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. RE-REGULATION AND AIRLINE PASSENGERS' RIGHTS TIMOTHY M. RAViCH* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................. 935 II. PASSENGERS' BILL OF RIGHTS .................. 939 A. THE IMPETUS AND HISTORICAL AT'TEMPTS ....... 939 1. The Origin of Passengers' Rights Proposals .... 940 2. Service, Competition, and Preemption.......... 945 B. THE INITIAL EFFORT (1999-2000) ............... 947 C. THE AIRLINES' RESPONSE AND COMMITMENT .... 952 D. THE FINAL DOT REPORT AND 2001 ............. 956 III. DISCU SSIO N ...................................... 958 A. WHITHER DEREGULATION? ...................... 958 B. CULTURAL DEVOLUTION ......................... 964 C. CONTRACT As PANACEA ......................... 970 D. DEMAND MANAGEMENT ......................... 976 1. (Over)Scheduling and Infrastructure .......... 977 2. Industry Consolidation and Market Entry ..... 986 E. SEPTEMBER 11, 2001: A NEW ROLE FOR AIRLINE PASSENGERS ..................................... 992 IV. CONCLUSION ..................................... 996 I. INTRODUCTION Airline passengers increasingly expect basic airline service as a matter of law and entitlement rather than as a function of busi- * Attorney, Hunton & Williams. J.D., cum laude, University of Miami School of Law. The author presented aspects of this Article at the "Fourth International Travel and Tourism: Policy, Law and Management Conference," Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, May, 2002. The author gratefully acknowledges the valuable comments on earlier drafts provided by Aaron Comenetz, Jaret Davis, Esq., Terrance A. Dee, Esq., Dana E. Foster, Esq., Heather Ravich, Esq., Robert D. Rightmyer, Esq., Loretta B. Todzia, Esq., and Justin B. Uhlemann, Esq. Thanks also to Yolanda Arnavat-Parga, Rosy Lopez, and Lois S. Randall for substantial support. This Article was written solely in the author's personal capacity and not on behalf of or at the request of any other. 935 936 JOURNAL OF AIR LAW AND COMMERCE ness and market forces. Unprecedented access to air travel, gen- erated in large part by low fares, has aggravated, distorted and reinforced this expectation. The tragic events of September 11, 2001 ("September 11"), during which terrorists hijacked four commercial jetliners and navigated two into New York City's World Trade Center Twin Towers and one into the Pentagon,' necessarily have amplified the role of law and government in the deregulated airline market. While the law affords Americans a relatively unfettered ability to travel,2 it has not, as a practical matter, secured pleasant or hassle-free travel in the modern der- egulated era. From 1999 through the current Congressional term, passenger and government outrage with airline' service and accountability energized federal legislators, themselves air- line passengers, to present more than three dozen proposals col- lectively referred to as the "Passengers' Bill of Rights" (the "PBOR").4 This Article examines and criticizes these popular and legislative impulses to secure better airline travel exper- iences within the United States by operation of law.' I A fourth airliner crashed in rural Pennsylvania after several passengers counter-attacked the hijackers onboard. JERE LONGMAN, AMONG TH-E HEROES: UNITED FLIGHT 93 AND THE PASSENGERS AND CREW WiHo FOUGHT BACK (HarperCollins 2002); see infra text accompanying note 263. See generally Robert A. Brazener, Annotation, Liability of Air Carrierfor Damage or Injury Sustained by Passenger as a Result of Hijacking, 72 A.L.R. 3d 1299 (1976). 2 United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 757, 758 (1966) (establishing that "freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution"). But see William Mann, Comment, All the (Air) Rage: Legal Implications Surrounding Airline and Government Bans on Unruly Passengers in the Sky, 65J. AIR L. & COM. 857 (2000) [hereinafter Mann, Airline and Government Bans on Unruly Passengers];John A. Glenn, Annotation, Validity, Under Commerce Clause of Federal Constitution, of State Tolls or Taxes On, Or Affecting, Interstate or For- eign Air Carriersor Passengers, 31 L. ED. 2D 975 (1999). 3 For convenience, notwithstanding differences among air travel providers, the terms "airline(s)" and/or "carrier(s)" are used throughout this Article to refer to both major air travel providers that route their flights within a hub-and-spoke system (see Part III.D.1, infra) and low-fare, specialty carriers such as Southwest Airlines and JetBlue, which offer point-to-point networks of flights. 4 The subject legislation joins modern governmental and popular-culture ef- forts to buttress perceived entitlements rather than constitutionally-secured rights with legislation bearing the historically-significant title "Bill of Rights," in- cluding, inter alia, Consumers' Bill of Rights, Health Care Bill of Rights, Patients' Bill of Rights, Taxpayer Bill of Rights, Veterans Bill of Rights, etc. Greenfield At Large, Are Some of the 'New Rights' the Wrong Stuff?. (CNN television broadcast, June 19, 2001) ("Are these the same kind of rights our forefathers fought and died for? ... sometimes it seems that every interest group has a proposal to create a new bill of rights."). For a discussion of airline passengers' rights initiatives overseas see Jeffrey Goh, Air PassengerRights: The Third Way, 8 CONSUMER L.J. 407 (2000) (examining 2002] RE-REGULATION AND RIGHTS 937 The PBOR legislation will not improve airline service under any circumstances. These legislative efforts to codify passenger service rights are largely motivated by normative conceptualiza- tions of good and bad airline service and practices. In the ag- gregate, the PBOR legislation, coupled with the still-evolving reality presented by the novel terrorism of September 11, repre- sents an important point in the history of deregulated commer- cial airline travel. The PBOR proposals represent an unfulfilled Congressional appetite to regulate6 airline conduct and rede- fine the relationship between carrier and passenger.7 To the ex- tent that they promote government interposition between carrier and passenger with respect to basic service issues, the PBOR initiative establishes important, but unwanted and un- helpful precedent. While substantial commentary exists as to the economic benefits, weaknesses and imagined consequences of the deregulated airline system,' this Article examines the ser- the European Commission's "Airline Passenger Service Commitment" and "Air- port Voluntary Commitment on Air Passenger Services"); see also Ellchiro Seki- gawa, Japan Tackles Flight Rights of Mentally Ill Passengers, AVIATION WK. & SPACE TECI., July 15, 2002, at 44. 6 Strong impulses to regulate the domestic airline industry have remained con- stant notwithstanding the social, political, and economic transformations result- ing from September 11. As Representative Peter DeFazio (D-Or.) notes: This was an industry that was tremendously mismanaged before 9/11 . Remember the big subject before 9/11 was passenger rights because people felt so abused ... We need to begin to think about whether we're going to have to regulate this industry again. NBC NEws' Meet the Press (NBC television broadcast, Aug. 18, 2002).. See also Con- gress Calls Airline Execs on Carpet, ATLANTA J.-CONST., Feb. 7, 2001, at 2 (noting Senator Ernest Hollings's (D-S.C.) self-characterization as a "born-again regulator"). 7 Zachary Garsek, Comment, Giving Power Back to the Passengers: The Airline Pas- sengers'Bill of Rights, 66J. AIR L. & COM. 1187, 1190 (2001) (surveying 1999 legis- lation, reporting related Congressional testimony and suggesting that, if voluntary airline efforts are "fruitless, the state of customer service in the airline industry has disintegrated to the point that some government regulation is neces- sary."); Brent D. Bowen & Dean E. Headley, The Airline Quality Rating 2001, at 7 ("Given the complexity of the problem, lack of desire by the airlines to help themselves and the consumer, and the need to better utilize public resources, government intervention seems necessary and appropriate."). 8 See, e.g., GEORGE WILLIAMS, AIRLINE COMPETITION: DEREGULATION'S MIXED LEGACY (Ashgate 2002); KENNETH BUTrON & ROGER STOUGH, AIR TRANSPORT NET- WORKS (2000); GEORGE WILLIAMS, THE AiRLINE INDUSTRY AND THE IMPACT OF DER- EGULATION (1993); PAUL STEPHEN DEMPSEY & ANDREW R. GOETZ, AIRLINE DEREGULATION AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE MYTHOLOGY (1992); Laurence E. Gesell & Mar- tin T. Farris, Airline Deregulation: An Evaluation of Goals and Objectives, 21 TRANSP. L.J. 105 (1992); Theodore P. Harris, The Disaster of Deregulation,20 TRANSP. L.J. 87 (1991); Alfred E. Kahn, Deregulation:Looking Backward and Looking Forward,7 YALE 938 JOURNAL OF AIR LAW AND COMMERCE vice-oriented initiative of the PBOR legislation as one negatively implicating and undermining the efficacy and future of com- mercial airline deregulation policy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CC22 N848AE HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 5 £1 CC203 OK
    CC22 N848AE HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 5 £1 CC203 OK-HFM Tupolev Tu-134 CSA -large OK on fin 91 2 £3 CC211 G-31-962 HP Jetstream 31 American eagle 92 2 £1 CC368 N4213X Douglas DC-6 Northern Air Cargo 88 4 £2 CC373 G-BFPV C-47 ex Spanish AF T3-45/744-45 78 1 £4 CC446 G31-862 HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 3 £1 CC487 CS-TKC Boeing 737-300 Air Columbus 93 3 £2 CC489 PT-OKF DHC8/300 TABA 93 2 £2 CC510 G-BLRT Short SD-360 ex Air Business 87 1 £2 CC567 N400RG Boeing 727 89 1 £2 CC573 G31-813 HP Jetstream 31 white 88 1 £1 CC574 N5073L Boeing 727 84 1 £2 CC595 G-BEKG HS 748 87 2 £2 CC603 N727KS Boeing 727 87 1 £2 CC608 N331QQ HP Jetstream 31 white 88 2 £1 CC610 D-BERT DHC8 Contactair c/s 88 5 £1 CC636 C-FBIP HP Jetstream 31 white 88 3 £1 CC650 HZ-DG1 Boeing 727 87 1 £2 CC732 D-CDIC SAAB SF-340 Delta Air 89 1 £2 CC735 C-FAMK HP Jetstream 31 Canadian partner/Air Toronto 89 1 £2 CC738 TC-VAB Boeing 737 Sultan Air 93 1 £2 CC760 G31-841 HP Jetstream 31 American Eagle 89 3 £1 CC762 C-GDBR HP Jetstream 31 Air Toronto 89 3 £1 CC821 G-DVON DH Devon C.2 RAF c/s VP955 89 1 £1 CC824 G-OOOH Boeing 757 Air 2000 89 3 £1 CC826 VT-EPW Boeing 747-300 Air India 89 3 £1 CC834 G-OOOA Boeing 757 Air 2000 89 4 £1 CC876 G-BHHU Short SD-330 89 3 £1 CC901 9H-ABE Boeing 737 Air Malta 88 2 £1 CC911 EC-ECR Boeing 737-300 Air Europa 89 3 £1 CC922 G-BKTN HP Jetstream 31 Euroflite 84 4 £1 CC924 I-ATSA Cessna 650 Aerotaxisud 89 3 £1 CC936 C-GCPG Douglas DC-10 Canadian 87 3 £1 CC940 G-BSMY HP Jetstream 31 Pan Am Express 90 2 £2 CC945 7T-VHG Lockheed C-130H Air Algerie
    [Show full text]
  • Report to the Legislature: Indoor Air Pollution in California
    California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board Report to the California Legislature INDOOR AIR POLLUTION IN CALIFORNIA A report submitted by: California Air Resources Board July, 2005 Pursuant to Health and Safety Code § 39930 (Assembly Bill 1173, Keeley, 2002) Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor Indoor Air Pollution in California July, 2005 ii Indoor Air Pollution in California July, 2005 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared with the able and dedicated support from Jacqueline Cummins, Marisa Bolander, Jeania Delaney, Elizabeth Byers, and Heather Choi. We appreciate the valuable input received from the following groups: • Many government agency representatives who provided information and thoughtful comments on draft reports, especially Jed Waldman, Sandy McNeel, Janet Macher, Feng Tsai, and Elizabeth Katz, Department of Health Services; Richard Lam and Bob Blaisdell, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment; Deborah Gold and Bob Nakamura, Cal/OSHA; Bill Pennington and Bruce Maeda, California Energy Commission; Dana Papke and Kathy Frevert, California Integrated Waste Management Board; Randy Segawa, and Madeline Brattesani, Department of Pesticide Regulation; and many others. • Bill Fisk, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, for assistance in assessing the costs of indoor pollution. • Susan Lum, ARB, project website management, and Chris Jakober, for general technical assistance. • Stakeholders from the public and private sectors, who attended the public workshops and shared their experiences and suggestions
    [Show full text]
  • The 22Nd Annual Greater Washington Aviation Open
    THE 22ND ANNUAL GREatER WASHINgtON AVIatION OPEN Charity Golf Tournament & Auction Lansdowne Resort Lansdowne, Virginia May 24, 2010 3213 Duke Street, #207, AlexAndriA, VirginiA 22314 • www.gwAo.org Dear Friends of the GWAO: We welcome everyone to the 22nd Annual Greater Washington Aviation Open – the largest aviation charity event in Washington, DC. Given the state of the economy, it is a testament to the great support the tournament has received from the aviation industry. As our contributions from the GWAO to the Corporate Angel Network continue to grow, so has the number of cancer patients they have transported to treatment facilities across the country. CAN has now transported over 34,000 patients in the empty seats of corporate aircraft for life-saving medical treatment at some of our nation’s finest hospitals. We are very pleased to have Clay Jones, Chairman, President, and CEO of Rockwell Collins, serve as our Honorary Chairman this year. Clay has served on many important aviation boards, and his leadership and service are recognized by all in the industry. His participation today as our Honorary Chairman of the 22nd Annual GWAO is appreciated and well warranted. The GWAO would not be the premier charity event that it is without the tremendous support of Diamond Sponsor FlightSafety International and Gold Sponsor Aviation Partners Boeing. Through their very generous donations we are well on our way to a successful tournament. They are joined by other major donors in this program and are on our signage in recognition of their wonderful support. The airlines that have donated tickets for the live auction this year also merit our special recognition.
    [Show full text]
  • TWA's Caribbean Flights Caribbean Cure for The
    VOLUME 48 NUMBER 9 MAY 6, 1985 Caribbean . TWA's Caribbean Flights Cure for The Doldrums TWA will fly to the Caribbean this fall, President Ed Meyer announced. The air­ line willserve nine Caribbean destinations from New York starting November 15; at the same time, it will inaugurate non-stop service between St. Louis and SanJuan. Islands to be served are St. Thomas, the Bahamas, St. Maarten, St. Croix, Antigua, Martinique, Guadeloupe and Puerto Rico. For more than a decade TWA has con­ sistently been the leading airline across . the North Atlantic in terms of passengers carried. With the addition of the Caribbean routes, TWA willadd an important North­ South dimension to its internationalserv­ ices, Mr. Meyer said. "We expect that strong winter loads to Caribbean vacation destinations will help TWA counterbalance relatively light transatlantic traffic at that time of year, . and vice versa," he explained. "Travelers willbenefit from TWA's premiere experi­ ence in international operations and its reputation for excellent service," he added. Mr. Meyer emphasized TWA's leader­ ship as the largest tour operator across the Atlantic, and pointed to the airline's feeder network at both Kennedy and St. Louis: "Passengers from the west and midwest caneasily connect into these ma- (topage4) Freeport � 1st Quarter: Nassau SAN JUAN A Bit Better St. Thomas With the publication of TWA's first-quar­ St. Croix ter financial results,· the perennial ques­ tion recurs: "With load factors like that, how could we lose so much money?" Martinique As always, the answer isn't simple. First the numbers, then the words.
    [Show full text]
  • My Personal Callsign List This List Was Not Designed for Publication However Due to Several Requests I Have Decided to Make It Downloadable
    - www.egxwinfogroup.co.uk - The EGXWinfo Group of Twitter Accounts - @EGXWinfoGroup on Twitter - My Personal Callsign List This list was not designed for publication however due to several requests I have decided to make it downloadable. It is a mixture of listed callsigns and logged callsigns so some have numbers after the callsign as they were heard. Use CTL+F in Adobe Reader to search for your callsign Callsign ICAO/PRI IATA Unit Type Based Country Type ABG AAB W9 Abelag Aviation Belgium Civil ARMYAIR AAC Army Air Corps United Kingdom Civil AgustaWestland Lynx AH.9A/AW159 Wildcat ARMYAIR 200# AAC 2Regt | AAC AH.1 AAC Middle Wallop United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 300# AAC 3Regt | AAC AgustaWestland AH-64 Apache AH.1 RAF Wattisham United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 400# AAC 4Regt | AAC AgustaWestland AH-64 Apache AH.1 RAF Wattisham United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 500# AAC 5Regt AAC/RAF Britten-Norman Islander/Defender JHCFS Aldergrove United Kingdom Military ARMYAIR 600# AAC 657Sqn | JSFAW | AAC Various RAF Odiham United Kingdom Military Ambassador AAD Mann Air Ltd United Kingdom Civil AIGLE AZUR AAF ZI Aigle Azur France Civil ATLANTIC AAG KI Air Atlantique United Kingdom Civil ATLANTIC AAG Atlantic Flight Training United Kingdom Civil ALOHA AAH KH Aloha Air Cargo United States Civil BOREALIS AAI Air Aurora United States Civil ALFA SUDAN AAJ Alfa Airlines Sudan Civil ALASKA ISLAND AAK Alaska Island Air United States Civil AMERICAN AAL AA American Airlines United States Civil AM CORP AAM Aviation Management Corporation United States Civil
    [Show full text]
  • Jetblue Honors Public Servants for Inspiring Humanity
    www.MetroAirportNews.com Serving the Airport Workforce and Local Communities June 2017 research to create international awareness for INSIDE THIS ISSUE neuroblastoma. Last year’s event raised $123,000. All in attendance received a special treat, a first glimpse at JetBlue’s newest special livery — “Blue Finest” — dedicated to New York City’s more than 36,000 officers. Twenty three teams, consisting of nearly 300 participants, partici- pated in timed trials to pull “Blue Finest,” an Airbus 320 aircraft, 100 feet in the fastest amount of time to raise funds for the J-A-C-K Foundation. Participants were among the first to view this aircraft adorned with the NYPD flag, badge and shield. “Blue Finest” will join JetBlue’s fleet flying FOD Clean Up Event at JFK throughout the airline’s network, currently 101 Page 2 JetBlue Honors Public Servants cities and growing. The aircraft honoring the NYPD joins JetBlue’s exclusive legion of ser- for Inspiring Humanity vice-focused aircraft including “Blue Bravest” JetBlue Debuts ‘Blue Finest’ Aircraft dedicated to the FDNY, “Vets in Blue” honoring veterans past and present and “Bluemanity” - a Dedicated to the New York Police Department tribute to all JetBlue crewmembers who bring JetBlue has a long history of supporting those department competed against teams including the airline’s mission of inspiring humanity to who serve their communities. Today public ser- JetBlue crewmembers and members from local life every day. vants from New York and abroad joined forces authorities including the NYPD and FDNY to “As New York’s Hometown Airline, support- for a good cause.
    [Show full text]
  • Airline Schedules
    Airline Schedules This finding aid was produced using ArchivesSpace on January 08, 2019. English (eng) Describing Archives: A Content Standard Special Collections and Archives Division, History of Aviation Archives. 3020 Waterview Pkwy SP2 Suite 11.206 Richardson, Texas 75080 [email protected]. URL: https://www.utdallas.edu/library/special-collections-and-archives/ Airline Schedules Table of Contents Summary Information .................................................................................................................................... 3 Scope and Content ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Series Description .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Administrative Information ............................................................................................................................ 4 Related Materials ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Controlled Access Headings .......................................................................................................................... 5 Collection Inventory ....................................................................................................................................... 6 - Page 2 - Airline Schedules Summary Information Repository:
    [Show full text]
  • New Airlines Are Mailing National Headlines the Civil Aeronautics Board Has Approved 109 Helicopters
    f=*i£^am am rotp page two Industry notes New airlines are mailing national headlines The Civil Aeronautics Board has approved 109 helicopters. The helicopter shuttle flights percent below standard fares charged by major the proposed merger of Republic Airlines and will be offered by a company called New York commercial airlines. Hughes Air West. Republic, a recent product of Air which has no connection with the New York Loftliedr bypassed air traffic treaties by the Board’s generally favorable policy toward Air that will start jetliner shuttle flights between staying out of the International Air Traffic mergers, was created by the union of North LaGuardia and Washington National on Decem­ Association (lATA) and by using Luxembourg Central Airlines and Southern Airways. ber 14. as its European base. The Republic merger with Air West will The latter New York Air is a subsidiary of American students made it their carrier for create the country’s 11th largest carrier in terms Texas Air Corp., the recently formed parent summers abroad, and in Europe Greeks, Italians, of revenue passenger miles. Presidential approval holding company of Texas International Airlines. Germans, Frenchmen and Dutchmen flocked to was not required because there won’t be a formal The CAB has tentatively granted a certificate to Luxembourg to use the airline, which once ran transfer of route certificates. Hughes Air West the Texas Air subsidiary which was founded to as many as 25 flights a week each way. will become a subsidiary airline, named Republic compete in the New York-Washington shuttle The airline made a stopover at Keflavik Air­ Airlines West.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview and Trends
    9310-01 Chapter 1 10/12/99 14:48 Page 15 1 M Overview and Trends The Transportation Research Board (TRB) study committee that pro- duced Winds of Change held its final meeting in the spring of 1991. The committee had reviewed the general experience of the U.S. airline in- dustry during the more than a dozen years since legislation ended gov- ernment economic regulation of entry, pricing, and ticket distribution in the domestic market.1 The committee examined issues ranging from passenger fares and service in small communities to aviation safety and the federal government’s performance in accommodating the escalating demands on air traffic control. At the time, it was still being debated whether airline deregulation was favorable to consumers. Once viewed as contrary to the public interest,2 the vigorous airline competition 1 The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was preceded by market-oriented administra- tive reforms adopted by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) beginning in 1975. 2 Congress adopted the public utility form of regulation for the airline industry when it created CAB, partly out of concern that the small scale of the industry and number of willing entrants would lead to excessive competition and capacity, ultimately having neg- ative effects on service and perhaps leading to monopolies and having adverse effects on consumers in the end (Levine 1965; Meyer et al. 1959). 15 9310-01 Chapter 1 10/12/99 14:48 Page 16 16 ENTRY AND COMPETITION IN THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY spurred by deregulation now is commonly credited with generating large and lasting public benefits.
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Flight Statistics Report For
    DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TOTAL OPERATIONS AND TRAFFIC March 2014 March YEAR TO DATE % of % of % Grand % Grand Incr./ Incr./ Total Incr./ Incr./ Total 2014 2013 Decr. Decr. 2014 2014 2013 Decr. Decr. 2014 OPERATIONS (1) Air Carrier 36,129 35,883 246 0.7% 74.2% 99,808 101,345 (1,537) -1.5% 73.5% Air Taxi 12,187 13,754 (1,567) -11.4% 25.0% 34,884 38,400 (3,516) -9.2% 25.7% General Aviation 340 318 22 6.9% 0.7% 997 993 4 0.4% 0.7% Military 15 1 14 1400.0% 0.0% 18 23 (5) -21.7% 0.0% TOTAL 48,671 49,956 (1,285) -2.6% 100.0% 135,707 140,761 (5,054) -3.6% 100.0% PASSENGERS (2) International (3) Inbound 68,615 58,114 10,501 18.1% 176,572 144,140 32,432 22.5% Outbound 70,381 56,433 13,948 24.7% 174,705 137,789 36,916 26.8% TOTAL 138,996 114,547 24,449 21.3% 3.1% 351,277 281,929 69,348 24.6% 2.8% International/Pre-cleared Inbound 42,848 36,668 6,180 16.9% 121,892 102,711 19,181 18.7% Outbound 48,016 39,505 8,511 21.5% 132,548 108,136 24,412 22.6% TOTAL 90,864 76,173 14,691 19.3% 2.0% 254,440 210,847 43,593 20.7% 2.1% Majors (4) Inbound 1,698,200 1,685,003 13,197 0.8% 4,675,948 4,662,021 13,927 0.3% Outbound 1,743,844 1,713,061 30,783 1.8% 4,724,572 4,700,122 24,450 0.5% TOTAL 3,442,044 3,398,064 43,980 1.3% 75.7% 9,400,520 9,362,143 38,377 0.4% 75.9% National (5) Inbound 50,888 52,095 (1,207) -2.3% 139,237 127,899 11,338 8.9% Outbound 52,409 52,888 (479) -0.9% 139,959 127,940 12,019 9.4% TOTAL 103,297 104,983 (1,686) -1.6% 2.3% 279,196 255,839 23,357 9.1% 2.3% Regionals (6) Inbound 382,759 380,328 2,431 0.6% 1,046,306 1,028,865 17,441 1.7% Outbound
    [Show full text]
  • 2012-AIR-00014 in the Matter Of: ROBERT STEVEN MAWHINNEY
    U.S. Department of Labor Office of Administrative Law Judges 11870 Merchants Walk - Suite 204 Newport News, VA 23606 (757) 591-5140 (757) 591-5150 (FAX) Issue Date: 27 December 2018 CASE NO.: 2012-AIR-00014 In the Matter of: ROBERT STEVEN MAWHINNEY, Complainant, v. TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION LOCAL 591, Respondent. ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR DISPOSITIVE ACTION AND ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY DECISION This case arises under the employee protection provisions of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation and Investment Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR21), 49 U.S.C. § 42121 et seq. and its implementing regulations found at 29 C.F.R. § 1979. The purpose of AIR 21 is to protect employees who report alleged violations of air safety from discrimination and retaliation by their employer. Complainant, Mr. Robert Mawhinney, filed a complaint against American Airlines and Respondent, the Transportation Workers Union Local 591 (TWU). Complainant alleges he was “threatened, ignored, abandoned, and subjected to a hostile work environment” and ultimately terminated from employment on September 23, 2011, by American Airlines acting in concert with TWU.1 To prevail in an AIR 21 claim, a complainant2 must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he engaged in protected activity, and the respondent subjected him to the unfavorable personnel action alleged in the complaint because he engaged in protected activity. Palmer v. Canadian National Railway/Illinois Central Railroad Co., ARB No. 16-035, 2016 WL 6024269, ALJ No. 2014-FRS-00154 (ARB Sep. 30, 2016); §42121(b)(2)(B)(iii). 1 Mawhinney Complaint filed October 5, 2011 (2011 Complaint).
    [Show full text]
  • Nantucket Memorial Airport Page 32
    OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL AIR TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION 2nd Quarter 2011 Nantucket Memorial Airport page 32 Also Inside: • A Workers Compensation Controversy • Swift Justice: DOT Enforcement • Benefits of Airport Minimum Standards GET IT ALL AT AVFUEL All Aviation Fuels / Contract Fuel / Pilot Incentive Programs Fuel Quality Assurance / Refueling Equipment / Aviation Insurance Fuel Storage Systems / Flight Planning and Trip Support Global Supplier of Aviation Fuel and Services 800.521.4106 • www.avfuel.com • facebook.com/avfuel • twitter.com/AVFUELtweeter NetJets Ad - FIRST, BEST, ONLY – AVIATION BUSINESS JOURNAL – Q2 2011 First. Best. Only. NetJets® pioneered the concept of fractional jet ownership in 1986 and became a Berkshire Hathaway company in 1998. And to this day, we are driven to be the best in the business without compromise. It’s why our safety standards are so exacting, our global infrastructure is so extensive, and our service is so sophisticated. When it comes to the best in private aviation, discerning fl iers know there’s Only NetJets®. SHARE | LEASE | CARD | ON ACCOUNT | MANAGEMENT 1.877.JET.0139 | NETJETS.COM A Berkshire Hathaway company All fractional aircraft offered by NetJets® in the United States are managed and operated by NetJets Aviation, Inc. Executive Jet® Management, Inc. provides management services for customers with aircraft that are not fractionally owned, and provides charter air transportation services using select aircraft from its managed fleet. Marquis Jet® Partners, Inc. sells the Marquis Jet Card®. Marquis Jet Card flights are operated by NetJets Aviation under its 14 CFR Part 135 Air Carrier Certificate. Each of these companies is a wholly owned subsidiary of NetJets Inc.
    [Show full text]